Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Active topics Unanswered topics
The forums have moved!
Click here to use the new forums. Enjoy!
Search options (Page 55 of 87)
religion is exactly the result of an increase in IQ in the human species.
When able to think about his situation he has an internal conflict. His instinct tells him to be alive at all cost (and fight his way to success) and his mind tells him there is no reason nor purpose in life whatsoever. So they invented religion. If it wasn't invented, it would. They probably invented it countless times. It is proven that the prehistoric man had forms of religion.
It is ironic that this black anarchist was celebrated as a demi-god because Christianity was enforced by the roman emperor.
there is a "no Berlusconi" day.
*Lp opens a bottle of champagne* Who wants a drink?
They will not come automatically. You need a lot of energy and resources to create this "renewable" energy. When resources run out, econ goes down, and no one will be able to invest in these things which will be very costly to produce.
There is, unless we discover something new, no cheap replacement for oil energy. Which means we will all be poorer, and also means we might have to colonize again to secure our food supply.
Yes. Only if national taxes go down sufficiently, I'm for a European tax system. (with less taxes in total)
But I was referring to the election part.
there are 400 "virtual slaves" or something for everybody in the form of oil barrels if you do the math. Whatever the number is, it will go down more rapidly as the level of effectiveness increases to compensate. I'm one of the believers in nuclear fusion. If they invest more in it now, it can secure our future.
you know its not a matter of "lasting" but of ROEI. You made lots of posts about it once if I remember well.
"Iron is an infinite resource"
No, it really depends. Its all about the cost to harvest* it in correlation to the gain. (*whats the correct term again in English?)
Its an interesting discussion EH, I will react to topic later.
What can I say. These "prices" and "rewards" are there for stupid people to believe in. There is no way whatsoever you can confirm their integrity.
He talks of a military and police force to control a population within a nation, clearly different from only a military force used to engage on foreign ground.(mostly -but not exclusively- to engage other organized forces)
I'm with you now Jus, and agree.
The political forum: Place for no-lifes to troll and confirm their disapproval of people with a different opinion.
The forum rules:
"Everyone is entitled to their own view and opinion on world events."- Nobody is listening to another.
"Here on the politics forum there will be little censorship (if any at all) of the threads and debates started by individuals."-there are few mods and those are lazy
"This may mean that some threads can cause offence and so player discretion is advised."-We don't want to lose anymore players, IC is already poorly populated these days.
"Swear words however are still illegal on this board and will be edited."-We can still censor but only if we want to.
"A copy of the forum rules can be found here: http://www.imperialconflict.com/explain
roflmao@yell
@bief:
there was a lot of resistance against Blair. Notice how the "president of europe" is expected to solve many difficult frictions without having much real power. Its more a propaganda tool then a real function. Other people hold the power, its mostly just a face.
Somebody who succeeds by taking no high profile and never showing his POV yet always looks serious. In a strange way I think he will do better as a European president then he did as ruler of our country (nothing).
I regret tough he wasn't elected by vote.
What exactly did he achieve I wonder? Although there might be some progress behind the screens, I.m.o. very little. OK it is very difficult and the odds are against him in this one, but failing again after everything else this president has done is a crying shame.
I'm still waiting for the first big positive thing after he got elected. Right now he mostly failed with a few small victories.
maybe, my knowledge of English is not adequate for that. But you get what I mean by now I guess.
"I think it's desirable to have a monopoly on force."
That needs more explanation. The first thing that comes to mind when reading this is the soviet union and that is probably not what you mean.
"Well, I tried."
I'm wasn't referring to you when I said the subject was to difficult, but to the fact it had few responses when I posted it. I'm glad you posted.
"And I never claimed that our rail system worked well, just that it works better than it would otherwise icon39"
Problem is we have few practical examples to compare what it would have been.
"Other than that, I can't really tell if you're agreeing with me, disagreeing or playing Devil's Advocate"
I agree with the biggest part, but I always play the devil's advocate. It is my system to gain more insight myself. It drives most people on this forum mad. 
Posts found: 1,351 to 1,375 of 2,163